Endoscopic Trimodal Imaging Detects Colonic Neoplasia as Well as Standard Video Endoscopy

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic trimodal imaging (ETMI) is a novel endoscopic technique that combines high-resolution endoscopy (HRE), autofluorescence imaging (AFI), and narrow-band imaging (NBI) that has only been studied in academic settings. We performed a randomized, controlled trial in a nonacademic setting to compare ETMI with standard video endoscopy (SVE) in the detection and differentiation of colorectal lesions. METHODS: The study included 234 patients scheduled to receive colonoscopy who were randomly assigned to undergo a colonoscopy in tandem with either ETMI or SVE. In the ETMI group (n = 118), first examination was performed using HRE, followed by AFI. In the other group, both examinations were performed using SVE (n = 116). In the ETMI group, detected lesions were differentiated using AFI and NBI. RESULTS: In the ETMI group, 87 adenomas were detected in the first examination (with HRE), and then 34 adenomas were detected during second inspection (with AFI). In the SVE group, 79 adenomas were detected during the first inspection, and then 33 adenomas were detected during the second inspection. Adenoma detection rates did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (ETMI: 1.03 vs SVE: 0.97, P = .360). The adenoma miss-rate was 29% for HRE and 28% for SVE. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of NBI in differentiating adenomas from nonadenomatous lesions were 87%, 63%, and 75%, respectively; corresponding values for AFI were 90%, 37%, and 62%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a nonacademic setting, ETMI did not improve the detection rate for adenomas compared with SVE. NBI and AFI each differentiated colonic lesions with high levels of sensitivity but low levels of specificit

Quality of Barrett's surveillance in The Netherlands: a standardized review of endoscopy and pathology reports

OBJECTIVE: The quality of Barrett's surveillance relies on an adequate endoscopic inspection, obtaining a sufficient number of biopsy specimens, good communication of the endoscopic findings to the pathologist, and an accurate description of the histological findings by the pathologist. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of Barrett's surveillance in daily practice in The Netherlands. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A structured scoring list was developed to evaluate systematically the quality of endoscopy and pathology reports. From 15 hospitals, endoscopy reports and corresponding pathology reports were selected randomly and evaluated by two observers. In case of disagreement, the observers re-evaluated the reports in a consensus meeting. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty cases were evaluated. The adherence to current standard biopsy protocols (four quadrant biopsies every 2 cm) decreased with increasing Barrett's length: 0-5 cm: 79%; 5-10 cm: 50%; 10-15 cm: 30%. The indication for the endoscopy was mentioned in 28% of the pathology reports, in 4% the presence/absence of oesophagitis was communicated, and in 19% the location and/or aetiology of biopsies was described. The presence/absence of dysplasia was mentioned in 93% of pathology reports. CONCLUSION: Endoscopy reports and pathology reports in current practice do not include all relevant information for an adequate Barrett's surveillance. In short Barrett's oesophagus, the adherence to current standard biopsy protocols is acceptable, but in longer segments (with a higher risk for neoplastic progression) this is clearly insufficient. The communication between endoscopists and pathologist is suboptima

Combining Autofluorescence Imaging and Narrow-Band Imaging for the Differentiation of Adenomas from Non-Neoplastic Colonic Polyps Among Experienced and Non-Experienced Endoscopists

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic tri-modal imaging incorporates high-resolution white-light endoscopy (HR-WLE), narrow-band imaging (NBI), and autofluorescence imaging (AFI). Combining these advanced techniques may improve endoscopic differentiation between adenomas and non-neoplastic polyps. In this study, we aimed to assess the interobserver variability and accuracy of HR-WLE, NBI, and AFI for polyp differentiation and to evaluate the combined use of AFI and NBI. METHODS: First, still images of 50 polyps (22 adenomas; median 3 mm) were randomly displayed to three experienced and four non-experienced endoscopists. All HR-WLE and NBI images were scored for Kudo classification and AFI images for color. Second, the combined AFI and NBI images were assessed using a newly developed algorithm by six additional non-experienced endoscopists. RESULTS: The outcomes measured were interobserver agreement and diagnostic accuracy using histopathology as reference standard. Experienced endoscopists had better interobserver agreement for NBI (kappa=0.77) than for AFI (kappa=0.33), whereas non-experienced endoscopists had better agreement for AFI (kappa=0.58) than for NBI (kappa=0.33). The accuracies of HR-WLE, NBI, and AFI among experienced endoscopists were 65, 70, and 74, respectively. Figures among non-experienced endoscopists were 57, 63, and 77. The algorithm was associated with a significantly higher accuracy of 85% among all observers (P <0.023). These figures were confirmed in the second evaluation study. CONCLUSIONS: Non-experienced endoscopists have better interobserver agreement and accuracy for AFI than for HR-WLE or NBI, indicating that AFI is easier to use for polyp differentiation in non-experienced setting. The newly developed algorithm, combining information of AFI and NBI together, had the highest accuracy and obtained equal results between experienced and non-experienced endoscopist

Validation of the Prague C&M classification of Barrett's esophagus in clinical practice

Background and study aims: The Prague C&M classification for Barrett's esophagus has found widespread acceptance but has only been validated by Barrett's experts scoring video sequences. To date, validation has been lacking for its application in routine practice during real-time endoscopy. The aim of this study was to evaluate agreement between Barrett's experts and community hospital endoscopists when using this classification to describe Barrett's esophagus and hiatal hernia length during real-time endoscopy.Patients and methods: Patients underwent two consecutive endoscopies performed by different endoscopists. The study was performed in two cohorts: one cohort was seen by Barrett's experts and the other cohort by community hospital endoscopists. Landmarks were recorded according to the Prague classification. Outcomes were interobserver agreement (assessed with intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]), absolute agreement, and relative agreement.Results: A total of 187 patients were included, with median extent of C3M5 (IQR C1 - 7 M4 - 9) for Barrett's esophagus and 3 cm (IQR 2 - 5) for hiatal hernia length. ICC was 0.91 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.88 - 0.93) for maximum length, 0.92 (95 %CI 0.90 - 0.94) for circumferential extent, and 0.59 (95 %CI 0.49 - 0.68) for hiatal hernia length. Absolute agreement within ≤ 1 cm was 74 % (95 %CI 68 - 80) for circumference, 68 % (95 %CI 62 - 75) for length, and 63 % (95 %CI 56 - 70) for hiatal hernia length. Relative agreement was 91 % for Barrett's esophagus and 80 % for hiatal hernia length. Barrett's experts and community hospital endoscopists showed no differences in agreement. Shorter Barrett's segments (≤ 5 cm) had lower agreement compared with longer segments (> 5 cm).Conclusions: Agreement was good for Barrett's esophagus and reasonable for hiatal hernia length. These findings strengthen the value of the Prague C&M classification to describe Barrett's esophagus and hiatal hernia length. Although absolute agreement during real-time endoscopy was high, one should anticipate that Barrett's values may vary by 1 - 2 cm between two endoscopie